JAWANSINGH RAMSINGH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant was convicted under Sections 304A, 279, 338 and 428, I. P. Code and under Section 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The conviction is challenged in revision.

(2.) In revision four points were urged, namely (1) That Ex. 18 which is a statement made by the accused at the police station reporting the accident is not admissible in evidence. Ex. 18 is a statement made by the accused. A statement made by a person can be admitted (1) to corroborate his evidence or (2) to contradict his evidence, or (3) as admission made by himself. In this case, it cannot be used either to corroborate or contradict the statement of the accused, because it is a statement made by the accused, who has not given evidence at the trial. An admission is defined in Section 17 of the Evidence Act as under :

(3.) But it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that a first information report cannot be used as evidence against the maker at the trial if he himself becomes an accused, and for this proposition, he has placed reliance on Nisar Mi v. State of U. P., (S) AIR 1957 SC 366. In this case, their lordships of the supreme Court have observed as follows: